Prince Hez Okonkwo V. Peoples Democratic Party & Ors (2013)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

JIMI OLUKAYODE BADA, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal from the Ruling of the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja in Suit No.: FHC/ABJ/CS/188/2013 – PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC PARTY & 4 OTHERS VS MR. FORT DIKE & ANOTHER; delivered on the 23rd day of January, 2013, wherein the Appellant’s application for joinder as an interested party was dismissed.

The Appellant dissatisfied with the Ruling of the lower court appealed to this Court.

The Learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant formulated four (4) issues for the determination of the Appeal. The issues are reproduced as follows: –

“(1) Whether having regard to the materials placed before the trial court and the courts own finding that the appellant was the nominated candidate of PDP, the Court was right in refusing to join him as a party interested in the subject matter of the suit. (Ground 1).

(2) Whether having regard to the evidence before the Court, the appellant abandoned his nomination by PDP and contested under the Labour Party. (Ground 2).

(3) Whether the trial Judge evaluated or properly evaluated all the evidence and materials placed before her in arriving at her decision that the appellant contested under the Labour Party. (Ground 4).

(4) Whether the Learned trial Judge did not prejudge the issues as it related to the appellant when, in an application for joinder, she delved into the issues of whether or not the Appellant contested under another political party, an issue which ought to be dealt with in the substantive suit. (Ground 5)”

The learned Counsel for the 5th Respondent adopted the issues formulated for the determination of the appeal by Counsel for the Appellant.

Counsel for the 6th Respondent did not file any brief of argument. He said that he would be bound by whatever decision arrived at by the Court.

It would be recalled that 1st to 4th Respondents were duly served with all the processes of Court and the Counsel for the Appellant obtained the leave of this Court to hear and determine this appeal based upon the Appellant’s brief of argument and the 5th Respondent’s brief of argument for failure of the other Respondents to file their briefs.

At the hearing, Learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant referred to the Appellant’s brief of argument filed on 13th March, 2013 and the Appellant’s reply brief filed on 17th May, 2013.

He adopted the two briefs and relied on it as his argument in urging that the appeal be allowed.

The Learned Counsel for the 5th Respondent in his own case also referred to the 5th Respondent’s brief of argument filed on 17th April, 2013 and the additional list of authorities filed on 1st July, 2013. He adopted the said brief and the list of authorities as his argument in urging that the appeal be dismissed.